[meta-intel] [PATCH] IGT: update 1.14 -> 1.15

[Saul Wold]

On Mon, 2016-09-12 at 08:17 +1200, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> Hi Jianxin,
> 
> On Fri, 09 Sep 2016 10:50:50 Jianxun Zhang wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > On Sep 9, 2016, at 7:34 AM, Saul Wold <sgw at linux.intel.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2016-09-08 at 17:02 -0700, Jianxun Zhang wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > This change update intel-gpu-tools to 1.15 as a sync-up with
> > > > Intel graphic stack 2016 Q2 release.
> > > > 
> > > > This change explicitly sets ${PV} in recipe and renames it
> > > > after package name only. By doing so we don't need to enforce
> > > > a policy to rename recipe every time we do update. Patch
> > > > speaks itself.
> > > 
> > > This is wrong!
> > > 
> > > The whole point of naming the recipe as ${PN}_${PV} is to remove
> > > the
> > > need to update PV in the recipe.
> > > 
> > > Yes checksums need to be updated on a regular basis, there are
> > > tools
> > > like devtool that can assist with this.
> > > 
> > > The OpenEmbedded standard is for $PN_$PV.bb filename this also
> > > assists
> > > in understand quickly what version a particular recipe is.  There
> > > are
> > > also limited cases where 2 different $PVs are needed for some
> > > reasons.
> > > 
> > > Please resubmit this as a normal update with $PV contained in the
> > > file
> > > name.
> > > 
> > > Please see: https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Best_Known_Methods
> > > _(BKMs
> > > )_for_Package_Updating
> > 
> > Saul,
> > I think the drawback of current procedure is it causes git “resets"
> > history
> > on recipe since new recipe when a renamed or git mv-ed recipe also
> > have too
> > much modifications. I don’t think git really tracks moving or
> > renaming:
> 
> It doesn't reset history. You're right that it doesn't track renames
> - that's 
> because rename detection is done whenever git looks at a change, not
> when the 
> change is applied. If you want to see the full history including
> renames, use 
> the --follow option.
> 
> Saul is correct, use of PV in the recipe filename is standard OE
> practice and 
> we don't want to be deviating from that - besides which I'm not sure
> we have 
> much to gain by doing so.
> 
Just to continue to clarify further:
1) The version adds uniqueness when there are multiple version
2) It's human readable for parsing by the eyes
3) There are some performance benefits to scripts and tools since they
do not have to open the file to parse out the PV 

Sau!

> Cheers,
> Paul
>